Two Texas abortion providers testified in federal court today about the difficulties they say they’ve faced keeping their doors open after the passage of Texas’ omnibus anti-abortion law, HB 2.
On Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Myron Thompson didn’t just block an Alabama admitting privileges requirement. He also made a powerful case for how targeted regulations of abortion providers further stigmatize abortion providers and patients.
On Monday, the first day of a new legal challenge to Texas’ omnibus anti-abortion law, expert witnesses testified that regulations in the state have negatively affected the ability of pregnant people who live in south and west Texas to access legal abortion care.
The ruling did not block the law permanently; it extends a temporary injunction blocking the law from taking effect.
The law provides an expansive host of benefits, including requirements that employers provide basic accommodations for pregnant workers. To get a better sense of this law and the strategy that made it win, RH Reality Check spoke with Debra Fitzpatrick of the University of Minnesota Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
The bill, known as An Act to Promote Public Safety and Protect Access to Reproductive Health Care Facilities, was rushed through the legislature after the state’s buffer zone law was struck down in June.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled a Mississippi admitting privileges law would create an undue burden on abortion rights if it forced the state’s only clinic to close. But the decision isn’t all good news for reproductive rights supporters.
The order gives attorneys for the state time to file a request with the U.S. Supreme Court to review an appeals court order blocking limitations on RU-486.
Senate Republicans opposed Harris’ nomination and accused Democrats of trying to stack the federal appeals court ahead of a pending challenge to the Affordable Care Act.
The lawsuit brought by conservative legal advocates accused the health-care provider of over $200 million in fraudulent billings.